If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Funny thing is, TT started as the "more serious" night to the rest of the time's "arsing around".

I do share the feeling that TT's got a bit too serious these days. On the other hand I don't know if you can both have a relaxed approach and ever get any missions started, let alone succeeded, with the number of people that turn up these days.

I think this is being blown out of proportion. If people are so desperate for more casual session then either hang around for the post TT shenanigans or organise lets say a Thursday cock around session.

The problem with "less serious" is that it more often than not descends into being disruptive and disrespectful towards the fun of the other players. My perception of both sessions is that the majority enjoys the approach sundays and tuesdays have. The server is open 24/7 and if people desire a "crash helis and blow shit up" session it would be a great idea to get it organized so there's room for itching that certain scratch.

Jim:
The W:EE session is being planned on the Folk ARPS board, I've opened the thread there as small sessions on this board tend to get drowned

I think this is being blown out of proportion. If people are so desperate for more casual session then either hang around for the post TT shenanigans or organise lets say a Thursday cock around session.

Fair enough, but it' just been my experience that it was harder to get casually involved with FOLK, as in, 'Get involved without knowing much, don't feel too stressed out, take it casually'. Crashing helis and stuff, no, not what I was talking about. With all the FOLK stuff I just didn't feel exactly welcome to dip my toe in if it's just once in forever, you know?

Originally Posted by Wolfenswan

Jim:
The W:EE session is being planned on the Folk ARPS board, I've opened the thread there as small sessions on this board tend to get drowned

Again, fair enough. But I'm just saying that this is somewhat symptomatic of what's been brought up -- the only place I know to check for stuff on W:EE is in the thread over here and on the Steam Groups. Both the general RPS group and RPStalin have been quiet.

Maybe, if threads for smaller sessions are getting drowned, rather than taking stuff off to forums not necessarily everyone knows about (like me), some other solution could be found like a new subdirectory in Game Clubs And General Sociability, or a google calendar somewhere.

OK, now that I’m not coming straight out of a terrible session of arma (a completely wasted 40 minutes on the first mission, and after a slow start the second fizzled out ended up a directionless clusterfuck that had to be called despite a huge number of players still being up) this bears some further explanation.

It was NOT about Fer. Sorry, Fer. I went too far with naming him instead of saying “no2folkarps”, because you are the effective leader and thus a visible target. (Also easier to type.) Whilst I disagree with him on numerous issues, few of them relating to anything of import to other people. I respect his strong interpersonal skills, organisational ability, drive to push things forwards and the stamina to keep doing so for years.

It was NOT about stopping Folk-ARPS. I don’t play arma much anymore and thus don’t have a say in how the people who do organise themselves or what they call themselves or anything like that.

It WAS about releasing frustrations over there basically being no way for people to say “no, I don’t think this is a good idea”. So it WAS about the concerns that people like Jim and Kataras have posted, in a much more serious and eloquent manner than I managed last night.

And I DO most definitely disagree with some of the structural changes – purely Folk folks have long made up a tiny proportion of the combined crowd, yet the group will move entirely to those forums, switch over to TS3 (which we’ve had huge arguments over before and the general consensus was always stick with mumble). There’s also the move to Skype instead of Steam Chats. At that point the balance has switched from being “Folk and RPS play together”, past where we ended up with “Folk runs sessions where RPS form the majority of the playerbase” to “RPS is an advertising post for Folk”.

The changes are presented as not mandatory but they kind of are. How many times has someone with an unrecognised name joined the server and been told to register / post / getonsteam / getonmumble / etc? It’s the way things (with varying levels of rudeness and demanding behaviour) work. Hell, we used to have threads on these forums for Folk nights, but those got stopped because people preferred using them to the ones on the Folk boards.

That’s not a merger, that’s a takeover. (Perhaps there is no way to have a merger at all)

The first I heard of it was not when someone approached me to say “we’re making some changes”. It was when I caught up with the group after what I thought at the time was a major security breach of the server. My name is on the contract for the hardware, so if it ends up being used for something nefarious I’m the one who gets in trouble. When I made enquiries things eventually got explained – access had been given to more people so the few who originally had access didn’t have to put up with constant requests to fix fucked up mission uploads. Harakka, saint that he is, started working on a technical solution such that box access would be less necessary, and that was/is one of his goals under Folk-ARPS.

I was never directly involved in any discussion about the future of the group, and I avoided getting myself involved because arma and steam chat stopped being fun for me. At the same time I never felt I was asked for my opinion on anything despite being tied into the structure of the group, and when I DID volunteer concerns or suggestions they were generally quashed. When I pointed out that we were going to be asking for donations immediately after the changeover and that this would be a breach of faith against those donating there was eventually some response (btw the server is still good for several months now). In the time taken for the organisational changes to be finalised, even though it took weeks and it will still be weeks before they’re “finished”, I’ve come to look back and realise that nobody has actually sat down and asked for an outside opinion on this. The reasoning being that “if they don’t like what we’re offering they can go elsewhere”. Suggesting that we’d be like other arma groups and trying to grab players from other big sites instead of being part of a larger community was largely ignored or talked out outside of my field of view. These are fair enough – I don’t play, I don’t organise things and I don’t make the decisions. It doesn’t mean I can’t be vexed by them though.

Folk has genuinely been a good thing for the ARPS group - it provided direction, organisation and new content. It gave the ARPS group access to another side of arma, as the Folk hosts have been kicking around since op flash and has stories about everyone and everything to do with the game. I had no issues with things staying the way they were. ( Actually, I’ll honest here and admit that wasn’t entirely true: I’ve been far from full of praise for the RPS forums in the past and at one point did strongly consider trying to do what the group is now doing. However, I was talked out of it. )

As to why I posted a terse reactionary thread? I asked myself if I would take part in the proposed community at any point in the period before, during or after I started playing arma. The answer I came to was “probably not”, and that frustrated me enough that I had to post SOMETHING as a counterpoint, and the bad session prior exacerbated my foul mood.

This thread changes nothing and I expected it to change nothing when I posted it, it’s why I list the good reasons for listening to the Hosts and doing what they say at the end of the first post. The merger is still going ahead as nobody has strongly objected to it– like I said to Bodge last night, if this thread changes anything it’s because the hosts have completely and utterly misjudged their target audience, which given the continuing sessions is obviously NOT the case.

I’ve one final thing to point out: ARPS was founded on donations from people who frequented the RPS steam chat. Not all of who play arma (either now or in the past). A number of the top donors are now Hosts on the Folk-ARPS circle and were heavily involved in the merger decision making process, but there’s still this itch I have that says the structural changes proposed would thus be in poor faith. It IS a small percentage, and I’ve started saying to those who ask (before this merger thing ever came up) that if they wanted to donate eg purely for mumble I would try to keep track of that as separate fund. Nobody actually took me up on that though.

Below are some of my personal thoughts (in bold) on a couple of paragraphs;

Originally Posted by Nullkigan

And I DO most definitely disagree with some of the structural changes – purely Folk folks have long made up a tiny proportion of the combined crowd, yet the group will move entirely to those forums, switch over to TS3 (which we’ve had huge arguments over before and the general consensus was always stick with mumble). There’s also the move to Skype instead of Steam Chats. At that point the balance has switched from being “Folk and RPS play together”, past where we ended up with “Folk runs sessions where RPS form the majority of the playerbase” to “RPS is an advertising post for Folk”.The forums being in one place would help for finding info, discussing stuff and organising games. A dedicated forum would help with the presentation of information and finding it. I would hope skype would be useful as it provides a semi permanent record of chat so arma types can discuss things in realtime and look back at what has been discussed in text chat that has passed. Personally I don't mind about the name, it is a label for us and as long as it isn't stupid I don't mind too much what it is

The changes are presented as not mandatory but they kind of are. How many times has someone with an unrecognised name joined the server and been told to register / post / getonsteam / getonmumble / etc? It’s the way things (with varying levels of rudeness and demanding behaviour) work. Hell, we used to have threads on these forums for Folk nights, but those got stopped because people preferred using them to the ones on the Folk boards. I agree that some people have been rather short and impolite regarding providing info and such, a welcoming community would benefit from a bit more consideration to new players. A single place to direct people to may help this.

That’s not a merger, that’s a takeover. (Perhaps there is no way to have a merger at all) I disagree with the term takeover. It is more a re-organisation, the same people are admins/hosts etc, most of the info is the same but things are trying to be put into one place.

I was never directly involved in any discussion about the future of the group, and I avoided getting myself involved because arma and steam chat stopped being fun for me. At the same time I never felt I was asked for my opinion on anything despite being tied into the structure of the group, and when I DID volunteer concerns or suggestions they were generally quashed. When I pointed out that we were going to be asking for donations immediately after the changeover and that this would be a breach of faith against those donating there was eventually some response (btw the server is still good for several months now). In the time taken for the organisational changes to be finalised, even though it took weeks and it will still be weeks before they’re “finished”, I’ve come to look back and realise that nobody has actually sat down and asked for an outside opinion on this. The reasoning being that “if they don’t like what we’re offering they can go elsewhere”. Suggesting that we’d be like other arma groups and trying to grab players from other big sites instead of being part of a larger community was largely ignored or talked out outside of my field of view. These are fair enough – I don’t play, I don’t organise things and I don’t make the decisions. It doesn’t mean I can’t be vexed by them though.I don't want people to feel that they want to not play arma with us. I think here the difference between the group and the sessions is key. I run sessions to allow people to play missions in an organised but fun manner, that is my aim anyway. At times this means telling people to be quiet or not to take the chopper again and so on. If people don't like that then they don't need to go away, we should be trying to organise arma sessions they are interested in playing in addition to the current ones. This has happened a little with certain mods but there is a lot of room for improvement in this, (a more "casual" session is something already mentioned and i have spoken to a couple of people about it).

This thread changes nothing and I expected it to change nothing when I posted it, it’s why I list the good reasons for listening to the Hosts and doing what they say at the end of the first post. The merger is still going ahead as nobody has strongly objected to it– like I said to Bodge last night, if this thread changes anything it’s because the hosts have completely and utterly misjudged their target audience, which given the continuing sessions is obviously NOT the case.

I’ve one final thing to point out: ARPS was founded on donations from people who frequented the RPS steam chat. Not all of who play arma (either now or in the past). A number of the top donors are now Hosts on the Folk-ARPS circle and were heavily involved in the merger decision making process, but there’s still this itch I have that says the structural changes proposed would thus be in poor faith. It IS a small percentage, and I’ve started saying to those who ask (before this merger thing ever came up) that if they wanted to donate eg purely for mumble I would try to keep track of that as separate fund. Nobody actually took me up on that though.I think it is important to note that changes from the merger would only be affecting the arma players as far as I can tell, so if anything they require the blessing of ARPS players.

As I have said I want to provide an enjoyable atmosphere for as many people as possible to enjoy arma. With a larger number of players we have not been able to have the less structured nights of old while still tackling a few missions. Personally I also enjoy an organised but relaxed approach to a mission so the CO/SL/FTL structure we use now helps co-ordinate things well so things don't degenerate into a bit of a mess.

My contributions to the development of this arma community have always been to further that goal of enjoyable arma for a large amount of people. If the structured nights are not everyone's cup of tea then we should work on a more freeform session at some point to cater for those wants, it doesn't have to be organised by anyone in particular someone just needs to start a thread to gauge interest and then sort it out. I work at organising structured sessions because that is what I enjoy doing mainly in arma. If you want to do something else then organise it, if you don't know where to start talk to me about it and lets work on it.

Fair enough, but it' just been my experience that it was harder to get casually involved with FOLK, as in, 'Get involved without knowing much, don't feel too stressed out, take it casually'. Crashing helis and stuff, no, not what I was talking about. With all the FOLK stuff I just didn't feel exactly welcome to dip my toe in if it's just once in forever, you know?Do you think that smaller irregular sessions would help with such things? Also do you think that because of the player numbers and structure it puts undue pressure on people to be "experienced" or show other similar traits (at your stressed out comment really)

Maybe, if threads for smaller sessions are getting drowned, rather than taking stuff off to forums not necessarily everyone knows about (like me), some other solution could be found like a new subdirectory in Game Clubs And General Sociability, or a google calendar somewhere.That was partly the thinking behind a single forum, a subdirectory would need to be passed in front of Jim. The issue with the calendar would be that it requires you to plan things in advance a bit more, maybe saying a couple of nights at 19:30 people turn up for arma and then just see what happens?

Okay, I was more talking about W:EE being pulled off to the side, re: the smaller side sessions thing/calendar/etc. I don't think that has much use for something like Arma which has some group visibility -- smaller games do not.

As for for smaller irregular sessions, I don't know. What seemed to work were the highly informal TT sessions I got in on and really enjoyed way back when, which were less stressful less because of the number of players and structure (This was right after Day Z came out and the population explosion), and more, I think, because of a more relaxed focus. My experience of FOLK is that it's a lot more focussed and serious, which is fine, it's just not something I feel comfortable dropping in on where I'm a new stranger.

Why?

FOLK has their own forums, big pages of rules, a player culture based around this socialist agrarian revolutionary thing, a distinct perspective that seems to say, to me, 'you're not welcome unless you're willing to invest time in us.'

Which is fine. But it just doesn't feel like something I want to participate in.

I kind of suspect, thinking back on it, that part of the reason for my drift away from ARMA might actually have something to do with this. I made time in my schedule for it specifically for quite a long time. Sunday night sessions were the first ones I felt less motivated to join, then, gradually, the Tuesday sessions. Unfortunately there is no one set of events that I can point at and say 'here is what made me disinterested', or 'here is what would bring me back.'

If you're looking to me to offer a solution, I don't think I can. But what I can say is that whatever this new thing is, it's not a solution so far as I'm concerned. I just want to get onto mumble now and then and blow some shit up with friendly people who have a similar perspective. I want to check the forums here, on RPS, because it's tied to a blog I read frequently and, as such, is easy for me to fit into my daily routine.

I'm probably not your target audience, Bodge. For me, this whole thing I want is where I can drop in and play games with minimum fuss. Setting up Skype, dragging myself around various forums I don't check regularly, needing to read rules and explanations which are 50% party propaganda developed by the ministry of agriculture and fermented goat fuels instead of a three word explanation, these things are all 'maximum fuss'.

II just want to get onto mumble now and then and blow some shit up with friendly people who have a similar perspective. I want to check the forums here, on RPS, because it's tied to a blog I read frequently and, as such, is easy for me to fit into my daily routine.

I'm probably not your target audience, Bodge. For me, this whole thing I want is where I can drop in and play games with minimum fuss. Setting up Skype, dragging myself around various forums I don't check regularly, needing to read rules and explanations which are 50% party propaganda developed by the ministry of agriculture and fermented goat fuels instead of a three word explanation, these things are all 'maximum fuss'.

I'm not Bodge, but I think we've failed to communicate our intent if you've gotten this impression. We are still aiming for the minimum fuss experience. As has always been the case with ARPS and Folk, all that has been required of the players is ARMA2 CO, voice comms software (which is now TS3 instead of either Mumble or TS3 depending on the day) and respect for your fellow players. This is still in effect.

Reading either this forum or the Folk forum has not been a requirement. It has obviously been a nice thing to do as that's where the community has gathered and a lot of info for the curious has been posted, but it has not been a requirement and still isn't.

Skype has not been made a requirement either, it is just a place to hang out specifically for ARMA stuff. As far as I know, no-one who is currently in the RPS Steam chat is leaving it because of this. I personally don't frequent the Steam chat any more because it is fairly high traffic. I was there primarily to pick up company for ad-hoc ARMAing, for which I don't have a lot of time now, and help people with ARMA related questions, which I don't have time and energy to monitor the chat activity for.

What I don't really understand is what you guys are actually trying to do. If you're trying to make FOLK into ShackTac jr. I don't think that's a good route to go... There are enough super-isolated pockets of communities for Arma already.

This merge/takeover whatever people fancy calling it is being made out to be a much bigger deal than I think it really is. Saying this or that is ending, then going on to say it's going to continue as it was before. Wha?

From playing both FOLK and TT sessions for months, I really didn't see much difference between the two. There were always more serious, structured missions which made up the "official" portion of the session, then the "after-session" where people play fun missions to unwind and mess about. This was the case on both sessions. The only way I think FOLK comes across as a little more "milsim" is with the no 3rd person setting.

The seriousness of the night was usually defined by who was hosting the session. Some hosts are little more laid back and some take on a more prominent authority figure. Regardless, the sessions played out using the same structure. We slot, we plan, we play.

All this gubbins about switching to Skype, do this and that instead of what we're doing already, I can't help but think of something Harakka posted recently (which I can't find here, might be on the FOLK forums) where he said "That's just changing things for the sake of change." And that was directed at someone asking if we were going to name missions differently with the new community.

So if that's change for the sake of change, what's the deal with using Skype all of a sudden? Don't we have a FOLK group on steam? Surely Steam is a far better platform to use as a gaming hub, since well.. It's designed to be as such. Skype is meant for calling people with high quality and hogging your bandwidth. Besides, why would you need MORE records of chats when you already have dedicated forums?

I don't know, I would've hoped that with relatively small communities like this we would have more communication about proposed big changes, so that we could discuss and find a good solution that most (if not all) people agreed with. Right now the split seems 50/50...

I can't help but think of something Harakka posted recently (which I can't find here, might be on the FOLK forums) where he said "That's just changing things for the sake of change." And that was directed at someone asking if we were going to name missions differently with the new community.

Yeah, but that was a bullshit question though. I didn't expect anybody to even bother answering that.

Yeah, but that was a bullshit question though. I didn't expect anybody to even bother answering that.

Tbh though I'd say it was a legit question... if we're taking the effort to name missions after a community then if the community name changes why wouldn't the label get changed as well? That's assuming people are being as serious about this as they imply.

So if that's change for the sake of change, what's the deal with using Skype all of a sudden?

Skype has always been used by FOLK as the next best thing to an IRC channel. No one's being forced to install or use skype and I have no idea where that notion comes from as it wasn't mentioned anywhere besides Null's post. The only reason for using Skype is because a dedicated Arma group chat has existed for quite a while in the form of the Folkgroup chat, which can be used to organize impromptu Arma or other Arma/group related stuff that might otherwise drown in the RPS steam chat.

Also it's easier to contact hosts via Skype (apart from PMs in the forums) as other than Steam they don't need to be online to receive the message.

Edit: After reading the announcement a second time I agree that the wording regarding the skype chat is unclear in whether it's mandatory or not.

Again: if you don't want to use Skype, that's not a problem at all. People will still linger in the RPS steam chat, hosts will continue to be online on Steam, Steam group announcements will continue to be made and above all the forums will the first place for all information and organization regarding Folk ARPS and sessions.

I don't know, I would've hoped that with relatively small communities like this we would have more communication about proposed big changes

In my opinion it's not a big change but a matter of convenience, mostly because of the reasons you've already listed. Everything that might be or is a problem can be discussed. E.g. the mumble server doesn't cease to exist and personally I wouldn't mind to keep using it. But then I'm really indifferent towards our preferred method of VOIP so someone else needs to raise that issue.

I've replied to the naming scheme question in the announcement thread over at the FA forums btw.

Anyway, I don't have much to add to the overall discussion. I wanted to move to another forum as in my opinion the mission making will profit from a dedicated sub forum and it will make it easier to get your missions tested and on the server. Apart from that, it's still the same old ArmA and I could only quote the last paragraph in the announcement.

What I don't really understand is what you guys are actually trying to do. If you're trying to make FOLK into ShackTac jr. I don't think that's a good route to go... There are enough super-isolated pockets of communities for Arma already.

What we are actually trying to do, concretely, is to have one set of things for the same purpose instead of two sets of things. Up to now we've had two names, two game servers, two VOIP servers, two forums, etc, even though the actual thing we do, the sessions, has been mostly the same. About the ShackTac jr. thing, you would need to be more specific about your concerns. ST runs closed sessions for people who have passed an application process, and has closed communication channels. Our sessions will still be open to everyone as they have been until now, same goes for the forum and the chat. We remain no mods required, no investment required. Just come play.

Originally Posted by Phalanx

This merge/takeover whatever people fancy calling it is being made out to be a much bigger deal than I think it really is. Saying this or that is ending, then going on to say it's going to continue as it was before. Wha?

I agree, maybe we haven't communicated about all this as clearly as we could have. This is probably in part because it has been a big deal for us hosts.

Originally Posted by Phalanx

From playing both FOLK and TT sessions for months, I really didn't see much difference between the two. There were always more serious, structured missions which made up the "official" portion of the session, then the "after-session" where people play fun missions to unwind and mess about. This was the case on both sessions.

Folk and TT have been similar by intent. Personally, for as long as I've been involved, the Folk style has been the standard to which I've tried to run the TT sessions I've had the pleasure of hosting. Simply because it provides for a consistent, enjoyable experience for the 40+ people involved (man... a year back, I used to think 20 people on the server was a lot!). There's been a lament for the loss of the less proper or serious ad-hoc sessions in this thread, and I think the afterparty helps with that to an extent. But figuring out a good way to get the ad-hoc sessions going again is on my personal todo list. I'm hoping that having an ARMA specific chat will help at least a bit on that front.

Originally Posted by Phalanx

So if that's change for the sake of change, what's the deal with using Skype all of a sudden? Don't we have a FOLK group on steam? Surely Steam is a far better platform to use as a gaming hub, since well.. It's designed to be as such. Skype is meant for calling people with high quality and hogging your bandwidth. Besides, why would you need MORE records of chats when you already have dedicated forums?

We have whole bunch of Steam groups right now. ARPS and Folk ones have been used for event reminders, nothing else. The RPS one is used for chat, but because it's not ARMA-specific, it has a lot of activity and it doesn't have a record, it's hard to catch the ARMA-related stuff if that's what one is specifically interested in. No-one is telling anyone to leave the RPS group chat.
The Skype group text chat is not mandatory and is meant to fill a purpose: if you want to have a realtime chat about ARMA and related activities specifically, it is a good place for that talk to get noticed. And because the chat has a record, it's possible for people to see what's been talked about and answer any questions asked while they were away. As lesser points, Skype group chat is also available on mobiles, unlike Steam group chat, and Skype is allowed on corporate etc networks more commonly than Steam. A forum is better suited for more permanent matters and longer-form discussions.

There is no intent (on my behalf) to change the way we play arma. It is purely a matter of how we present information and discussion for arma. The change to one voip and one (ish) forum is hoped to make things a bit simpler.

Sessions are not going to get more serious/milsim/exclusive and to be quite frank I don't know where that idea came from as that is not what this merge is about. People are reading too much into what is hoped to be an easier way to run sessions and talk about them.

The main reason for any session changes in the past has been the increase in player numbers, if you feel a session you were in was too serious or whatever talk to the person that hosted it.

My 2 cents.
Prehaps it's because I'm not playing in these sessions for long, just before the dayz explosion, but I didn't really see the big difference between the two sessions. The only things were VOIP and 3rd person. The hosts and the playerbase were mostly the same, and for me the merge makes sense and doesn't come as a surprise. for me that means there aren't two places to look for information or post aar's. Altough I would have preffered to use Mumble over TS, just for the fact that the overlay works. That is just how I see it.

Will you still be using these forums now that FOLK has annexed ARPS? I would think that potential Arma players would stumble across this forum far quicker than they would a dedicated milsim forum. It was mainly the AARs posted on here (and a mention or two from the front page of the site) what alerted me to the fact that there was fun to be had and I would be welcomed. I would never have dreamed of googling for dedicated Arma group forums when I started playing.

Are the steam groups totally defunct then? While I do get the point on the use of skype vs the steamgroups, it seemed to me the majority of players use steam. The ARPS groupchat is always empty, your right about that but I think its mainly because everyone just piles into the RPS groupchat. The FOLK steamgroup would seem to be the new obvious place but that's a closed group, invite only - is this intentional?

It's a merge, not an annexiation. Folk has stopped existing as much as ARPS has, it's one group now.
And yes, forums will still be used for general publicity like AARs and stickies.

that's a closed group, invite only - is this intentional

good point actually, I think that might be a remnant from the days when Folk was smaller and you'd have to write a short introduction mail. The problem with the ARPS steam group is that it has about 200 players, many of which I've never seen playing ArmA with us. That's the downside of "open for all".

Perhaps refering to the "new" group as "FOLK ARPS" is the wrong way of going about things, surely its an ARPS umbrella with the two subevents underneath Tactical Tuesday and FOLK Sunday. Perhaps viewing the sessions in this fashion rather than having one of the sessions (in this case FOLK) forging the group identity.

For me FOLK is just a day of the week. (All be it a glorious and wonderful day).